Mark Kelly Lied About Child Homicide Rates in the U.S.

[Raoul Duke]

http://factcheck.org/2013/01/child-homicides/

“How do we get to the point where 85% of children that are killed with guns are killed in the United States? That is a sobering statistic.” - Capt. Mark Kelly

Q: Is it true that 85 percent of all the children killed by guns in the world are killed in the United States?

A: No. This statistic, misused by the husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, refers to a study of 23 high-income countries in 2003 that made up less than 14 percent of the world’s population. A coauthor of that study says the percentage of children killed in the world who lived in the U.S. is “well, well, well under 85 percent.”

 

[Glocktogo]

It doesn't matter. If a liberal believes it, it MUST be the truth!

 

[mugsy]

I think you are going too far saying Mark Kelly lied. He certainly spoke incorrect info but it could be made quite correct if he simply added the words "in the industrialized world" or something like that. Since lying, versus just being wrong or ignorant, imputes intent I'd say give him the benefit of the doubt but by all means call out his error and correct it.

 

[WTJ]

But, dood, like he's an Asternot! Thay smart!

 

[Raoul Duke]

I think you are going too far saying Mark Kelly lied. He certainly spoke incorrect info but it could be made quite correct if he simply added the words "in the industrialized world" or something like that. Since lying, versus just being wrong or ignorant, imputes intent I'd say give him the benefit of the doubt but by all means call out his error and correct it.

Manipulated the facts is the best euphemism I'll concede for what he said, unless he publicly retracts his statement and admits he was wrong.

 

[WessonOil]

But, dood, like he's an Asternot! Thay smart!

..and if you disagree with him, then you're going to hurt his feelings..and he's going through a tough time right now being married to Mother Mary...and having to justify the fact they're not gun nuts in a previous life for shooting at an NRA range....

 

[Glocktogo]

I think you are going too far saying Mark Kelly lied. He certainly spoke incorrect info but it could be made quite correct if he simply added the words "in the industrialized world" or something like that. Since lying, versus just being wrong or ignorant, imputes intent I'd say give him the benefit of the doubt but by all means call out his error and correct it.

When you intentionally misstate a "fact" in order to mislead the public, it is a lie. I have no issues calling him a liar. They are all liars at this point. The president has lied. The VP has lied. Feinstein has lied. Bloomberg has lied. Cuomo has lied. Schumer has lied. And...Kelly has lied.

I have no sympathy for any of these anti-constitution deceivers at this point. God will judge them for their perfidy.

 

[mugsy]

When you intentionally misstate a "fact" in order to mislead the public, it is a lie. I have no issues calling him a liar. They are all liars at this point. The president has lied. The VP has lied. Feinstein has lied. Bloomberg has lied. Cuomo has lied. Schumer has lied. And...Kelly has lied.

I have no sympathy for any of these anti-constitution deceivers at this point. God will judge them for their perfidy.

Once again, I will state that he may have lied but a lie presumes intent - unless you read his mind or can somehow know that it wasn't just a a bonehead or sloppy research error - then just correct the fact. No need to throw around character attacks until/unless you know for certain. I agree with you that what he said was incorrect, I just don't believe that anyone should throw around the "liar" tag without a good strong reason and simply not liking the message just isn't good enough.

 

[Glocktogo]

Once again, I will state that he may have lied but a lie presumes intent - unless you read his mind or can somehow know that it wasn't just a a bonehead or sloppy research error - then just correct the fact. No need to throw around character attacks until/unless you know for certain. I agree with you that what he said was incorrect, I just don't believe that anyone should throw around the "liar" tag without a good strong reason and simply not liking the message just isn't good enough.

Anyone openly undermining our Constitutional rights deserves to have their character attacked. Besides that, I guess it's possible that Mr. Kelly could be open to being corrected. However, I can't imagine that someone hasn't tried to correct his misinformation at this point.

We'll just have to disagree on this one.

 

[Raoul Duke]

Once again, I will state that he may have lied but a lie presumes intent - unless you read his mind or can somehow know that it wasn't just a a bonehead or sloppy research error - then just correct the fact. No need to throw around character attacks until/unless you know for certain. I agree with you that what he said was incorrect, I just don't believe that anyone should throw around the "liar" tag without a good strong reason and simply not liking the message just isn't good enough.

Standing by a statement that is proven incorrect qualifies as lying in my book, unless and until he publicly admits he made a mistake or misspoke and retracts/corrects his statement, he's a liar as far as I'm concerned.